eagleal

Management is basically 99% people's relations/network. It doesn't matter how good the technical implementations are at the top, if they don't have the knowledge and capacity to enforce it downstream from middle layer to the base. There's so much people involved whose interests are farmed by your competitors.

Imposing it top down requires oppression. Imposing or pressuring this huge layer from the bottom requires a continuously updated base so you can squeeze from the top and the bottom to enact the changes needed quickly.

It's impossible for leaders at the top, to personally vet the members of a village or city council for example.

I think I've never seen any of such concatenation of events and organization to have ever happened.

I meant while the original five eyes are sharing raw sigint (we can also disagree on the level of sharing proportions), Israel gets also access to raw sigint intended as 3rd-country -> US.

The integration in the cyber domain is a different tier compared to the default the US has with other eyes.

The US _shares_ intel with the other Eyes, and within these there's layers of cooperation, with the US<->UK on top.

But this agreement concerns raw, non minimized, SIGINT (eg. direct tapping into feeds/traffic) mainly from US -> Israel.

Apparently one of the distributors that had access to the patch broke the plan and went live with it earlier. So they had to rush patches and disclosures.

These articles were supposed to come out in about a week

Minsk per the people that brokered it was just a temporary patch to prepare Ukraine for the invasion. So no. That's not it.

It's business and by now it should be clear to anyone that there's no morality involved in this space.

There's nothing wrong with Russia as energy partner, as long as you don't shoot yourself in the foot by blowing up the alternatives. South of EU had proper energy supplies from ME/NA. For example crisis in ME was mitigated by Russian energy or NA energy (Algeria, Tunisia, Lebanon, etc).

The new hegemons like Turkey, Israel, etc came only later, yet we can't say they're Saints can we? Also to appease the US administration line a lot of green energy projects were put on hold, and were only restarted this year after the Hormuz situation.

The only real explanation is shortsightness for personal interests (but even then you'd have to have all your capitals abroad), or being a tool for foreign interests.

Those can be said for other economic partners that are being used so no. That's not it, that's just rhetoric for the masses. _You'll here the same thing tomorrow, after I say the complete opposite today._

Yeah the EU leadership has been really shortsighted on these past decades (especially since the 10s), especially in their strategic energy and industrial sectors.

Be it the Ukranian conflict, the ME crisis, the NA wars and instabilities, etc. The EU is the one that geopolitically speaking lost the most.

Unless they're full puppets for foreign interests, I simply do not understand how they could leave foreign actors to dictate policies that affect thier own territory and enterprises without any sort of critical thought.

But even then, they could not have possibly been all mere puppets. And yet.

> Mail in ballots don’t get rid of secrecy

They mean voter buying cases, "paying you to confirm a vote for X" and see you check the card.

In ballot cabins the buyer can't come with you inside the booth to confirm, so your vote has verifiable privacy/secrecy.

It doesn't really solve all type of vote buying problems (like clientelism lists, etc), but removes that confirmation step.

> War is less imminent now than ever

You can always make your enemy. Current rearming efforts really remind historians of WW1 arm races.

At some point once so much interests and offers are at stake, that creating the demand is inevitable and just a matter of time.

Even the latest World Bank report, the defacto neoliberal institution, recognized a couple of months ago that leaving the industries focus be dictaed by purely capital decisions was bad, as in _really_ bad.

Do not know Germany's specific tax code, but in most EU countries should a control fire up it would result in tax evasion (not even tax avoidance), as in this case Germany can easily demonstrate the center of control is in fact in Germany.

Especially as you will have to file tax forms and disclosures for your salary.

You guys might want to take a consultation with a proper accountant/tax advisor for these setups.

Units will use any reinforced or cover position to carry their objective.

Even roofs of civilians apartments, let alone reinforced structures such as hospitals, town halls, schools, etc if they can't use alternatives.

Even antique frontal wars used terrain to their advantage. That's why we wrote rules of engagement, but if the bigger powers themselves abuse them, how can you expect militias that have to carry guerrilla or urban tactics to stand by them?

> Firing from schools, hospitals and resendential buildings.

I really don't want to descend into countless counterexamples, but that's how virtually every military or militia wages war, including the IDF. I assume your confusion on this issue may be due to a lack of familiarity with the subject.

Usually never ever has anything to do with malevolence (eg. in an attempt to use the counter strike as a propaganda story). More often, it's just a matter of convenience, logistics, and the realities of operating in populated areas.

If there's one thing that CIA manuals on training militias stressed on, or any military history book in that regard, it's that soldiers need to be fed and supported. Or they'll find ways to meet those needs without you.

Yes of course, but that's only the admin.

The strong minority base that has been artificially inflated to advance the personal interests of the leadership has linear roots dating back to the XX century rhetoric promoters and activists. In Europe there's the militant and militia groups of Gladio and the likes that thrived in illegal affairs and that have persisted and were integrated into power following 90s (case in point in Italy Berlusconi basically legalizing the MSI, AN, FdI and Lega by using his privately owned televisions and media, to acquire an election victory).